Recommendation 1. Undertake a substantive review of the project document

The review of the project would mainly aim at: 

- Documenting the change of scope and its subsequent implication on other project aspects such as budgeting.

- Developing a new governance model and management arrangements and address the gaps identified in this evaluation, mainly as related coordination and decision making mechanisms. - Re-design the M&E framework, including development of new SMART indicators that would obtain a robust evidence for the project intent (i.e capacity building) effectiveness and efficiency.

- Develop a new risk log that identifies emerging risks and mitigation strategies.

- Review the project outputs needs of experts and suggest resources allocations to each output including advice on the contracting modality (e,g full time expert vs short time assignment). 

Recommendation 2. Identify capacity needs and develop a capacity building plan

Despite the delay, the project team has recently developed a ToR to assess the capacity needs, this is now going through tendering process. It is important that this component is looked through carefully by identify the individual and institutional capacity needs in a systematic approach, and most importantly to be followed by a capacity building strategy that provides wide range of capacity building activities customised to address the priority needs, including means that ensure transfer of skills and knowledge such as mentorship or shadowing happening between recruited experts and MEWA staff.

The evaluation indicated that the sustainability of project achievements should be ensured, particularly due to the strong national ownership of these achievements. Most achievements are already institutionalized, which is an excellent first step toward sustainability. However, the project needs to define its exit strategy after the project ends including extension scenarios and how the MEWA would be able to run its business beyond the project.

Recommendation 3. Re-structure the project management unit with an intent to enhance the project management capacity and streamline decision making process

This should include supporting the PMU with strong project management capacities, clarifying project management duties clearly between the PMU members (PM, CTA, and NPC), and enabling the deputy minister to perform higher strategic role in the project decision making and governance. 

In order to fill the project management gap, it might be feasible to create a new position of a National Project Director (NPD) who reports directly to the deputy minister (the NPC) and directly manage the project manager and the CTA. The project director will need to be highly competent in applying UNDP project management framework and strong coordination and communication skills, the project director will have an overall responsibility for project-managing the entire project, implementing governance arrangements and coordinate the project delivery across the project teams and UNDP. This creates a hierarchical reportinglines in the project and enables the CTA and other technical experts to be more dedicated towards the technical aspects. This suggestion needs, however, to be investigated prior adoption, and after the understanding of the budget implications. 

Coordination and engagement in this project are seen at three levels,

d) Technical level: this involves coordination of the project activities level and make sure that project teams are aware of each other’s work, identify efficiencies and avoid duplication. e) At the project operation level: this includes coordination among the members of the project management team (NPC, CTA & PM), this coordination helps to achieve participatory decision making at the operational level. f) At the strategic level (project board): where seniors of the MEWA and UNDP meet to guide the project strategically and make strategic decisions such as project change of scope, approving work plan and budget, etc.

Recommendation 4. Re-activate the project board and project coordination group (currently called steering committee)

This project board is critically crucial in influencing the strategic directions of the project. The board is a strong governance platform to make on consensus-based management decisions for a project, provide strategic guidance and help to overcome risks. It is important to convene the project board with the same composition as described in the project document, at least, twice a year. The project board is particularly needed to oversee the implementation of the recommendation in this evaluation. 

It is also recommended that the project steering committee ToR is reviewed with an intent to make this a coordination platform only and no decision making, this may require to call it as Project Coordination Group (PCG) for technical coordination, harmonization, communication and linkages. The PCG should meet, at least, on a monthly basis to ensure proper coordination happening. 

Recommendation 5. UNDP to support the project with communication expertise

 It is obvious that there is inadequate communication of project achievements to MEWA decision makers and broader stakeholders. It is understood that UNDP CO has recently established a communication capacity to support various programs, and it is highly recommended that a communication specialist supports the PMU to communicate the project achievements appropriately and effectively. 

Recommendation 6. Upgrade the software and hardware assets to meet the modelling technical requirements

The project failed to obtain the required hardware and software to undertake the highly technical modelling work, as this is essential to undertake the modelling work on ongoing basis, it is recommended to invest in such a foundational basis to deliver high quality product and upgrade the already purchased software and hardware, and if required, buy a new ones. 

Recommendation 7. Assess the project financial needs and develop a resource mobilization plan

As noted in the evaluation, the project offers relatively limited resources comparing to the scale of the activities. The project is highly dependent on external funding, in some cases, non-recurrent public funding. It is recommended to assess the funding gaps, map funding opportunities and develop resource mobilisation plan including scenarios for securing the required funding. 

Recommendation 8. Review the project resourcing strategy and ToRs of all experts and address the deficit

It is recommended to undertake a holistic review of all experts ToRs to be more driven by the needs under each output, and balance the experts allocations to different outputs as well as review the expert engagement modality including short-term assignment in case if the sought deliverables don’t necessarily need a full time-job.

In light of these proposed changes in experts engagement modalities and other changes in resourcing strategy, the budget deficit need to be addressed as well.

Recommendation 9. Design fit-for-purpose reporting templates with a greater focus on the M&E framework – including the performance indicators

The monitoring template used by the project includes a long list of questions - in addition to the reporting on performance indicators - that need to be answered to complete a semi-annual monitoring report. It is too time consuming, cumbersome to complete and the result is that it does not provide accurate and timely information on how the project is progressing. There is a need to review the reporting template, to shorten it and focus on the performance framework with the set of indicators as the central part to measure how well the project is progressing toward the achievement of its expected outputs and outcomes.

On that front, it is important to guide the project management to deliver fit-forpurpose reporting. For example, developing a 1-page dashboard reporting template targeting decision makers.